DOCSLIB.ORG

Protecting Sunken Warships As Objects Entitled to Sovereign Immunity Jason R

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Protecting Sunken Warships As Objects Entitled to Sovereign Immunity Jason R University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Inter-American Law Review 4-1-2002 Protecting Sunken Warships as Objects Entitled to Sovereign Immunity Jason R. Harris Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umialr Recommended Citation Jason R. Harris, Protecting Sunken Warships as Objects Entitled to Sovereign Immunity, 33 U. Miami Inter-Am. L. Rev. 101 (2002) Available at: http://repository.law.miami.edu/umialr/vol33/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Inter- American Law Review by an authorized administrator of Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ARTICLE PROTECTING SUNKEN WARSHIPS AS OBJECTS ENTITLED TO SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY JASON R. HARRIS* I. Introduction ......................................... 102 II. Sovereign Immunity ................................. 104 A. Domestic Protection of Sunken Warships - Property Versus Sovereignty ..................... 104 1. United States v. California................... 104 2. Department Of State Practices .............. 105 3. U.S. Navy Practices .......................... 105 4. Property Assertions: Public Versus Private Interests ..................................... 106 5. U.S. Vessels in U.S. Waters - The Assertion of the Property Clause in Action ............. 107 B. Sovereign Immunity as Against Other Nations .. 110 1. UNCLOS - Generally ........................ 110 2. Is a Sunken Warship Entitled to Sovereign Im m unity? ...... 110 3. The Travelling Sovereign Entity - Heralds, Ambassadors, Marching Armies, and Bank A ccounts ..................................... 112 4. Generally Recognized Ways to Lose Sovereign Im m unity .................................... 116 5. Practices by Nations With Respect to W arships .................................... 117 a. U.S. Vessels in Non-U.S./Foreign W aters ................................... 118 * LLM. Ocean & Coastal Law, Univ. of Miami, School of Law 2001; J.D. Wake Forest Univ, School of Law, 2000; B.A. Auburn Univ, 1997. Mr. Harris is an Associate with Rountree & Seagle, LLP in the Port City of Wilmington, North Carolina where he has a general practice including admiralty and environmental law. He would like to thank Professor Bernard H. Oxman, Kelly Brooks, and Isabella Tyson for their contributions to this article as well as his family, to whom this Article is dedicated for their enduring support of his academic interests. 102 INTER-AMERICAN LAW REVIEW [Vol. 33:1 b. Foreign Vessels in U.S. Waters; Spain's Peculiar Practices ........................ 119 c. Foreign Vessels in Non-U.S Waters ...... 120 6. Incidental U.S. Misbehavior - Project Jennifer ...................................... 122 III. Conclusion ........................................... 125 I. INTRODUCTION The primary purpose of this article is to provide a sufficient legal basis upon which the United States may base its recently re- affirmed policy of protecting sunken warships. This article will illustrate international practices recognizing the important obli- gation to attach preferential protection to warships using the con- cept of sovereign immunity.' In the closing hours of his presidency, William J. Clinton issued the following Statement entitled "United States Policy for the Protection of Sunken Warships"2 : Thousands of United States government vessels, aircraft and spacecraft ("State craft"), as well as similar State craft of foreign nations, lie within and in waters beyond, the ter- ritorial sea and contiguous zone. Because of recent advances in science and technology, many of these sunken government vessels, aircraft and spacecraft have become accessible to salvors, treasure hunters and others. The unauthorized disturbance or recovery of these sunken State craft and any remains of their crews and passengers, is a growing concern both within the United States and inter- nationally. In addition to deserving treatment as gravesites, these sunken State craft may contain objects of a sensitive national security, archaeological or historical nature. They often also contain unexploded ordnance that could pose a danger to human health and the marine envi- ronment if disturbed, or other substances, including fuel oil and other hazardous liquids, that likewise pose a serious threat to human health and the marine environment if released. I believe that the United States policy should be clearly stated to meet this growing concern. Pursuant to the property clause of Article IV of the Constitution, the 1. For a discussion of protecting sunken warships based on the presence of deceased soldiers and sailors, see Jason R. Harris, The Protection of Sunken Warships as Gravesites at Sea, 7 OCEAN AND COASTAL L.J. (forthcoming 2001). 2. Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 195196 (Jan. 22, 2001), available at 2001 WL 14297091 [hereinafter Statement]. 20021 PROTECTING SUNKEN WARSHIPS 103 United States retains title indefinitely to its sunken State craft unless title has been abandoned or transferred in the manner Congress authorized or directed. The United States recognizes the rule of international law that title to foreign sunken State craft may be transferred or aban- doned only in accordance with the law of the foreign flag State. Further, the United States recognizes that title to a United States or foreign sunken State craft, wherever located, is not extinguished by passage of time, regardless of when such sunken State craft was lost at sea. International law encourages nations to preserve objects of maritime heritage wherever located for the bene- fit of the public. Those who would engage in unauthorized activities directed at sunken State craft are advised that disturbance or recovery of such craft should not occur with- out the express permission of the sovereign, and should only be conducted in accordance with professional scientific standards and with the utmost respect for any human remains. The United States will use its authority to protect and preserve sunken State craft of the United States and other nations, whether located in the waters of the United States, a foreign nation, or in international waters. The Statement seeks to protect state craft only, thereby inherently making a distinction between state and non-state craft.3 Although there are particular reasons to protect warships, some of which are addressed by the Statement,4 not all of the rationales offered in the Statement justify the distinction between State and non-State vessels. Furthermore, the Statement attempts to protect sunken war- ships by stating they should be given "deserving treatment as gravesites," as objects of "archaeological or historical nature" and to encourage the protection of "maritime heritage." These expla- nations alone are not unique to warships. The Statement apparently affirms Sea Hunt, Inc. v. Unidenti- fied Shipwrecked Vessel or Vessels5 , where the Fourth Circuit held that Spain did not abandon (either expressly or by implication) 3. Although the difference between state vessels, non-state vessels and the mixed use of state vessels is a challenging issue, it is beyond the scope of this article. This article will assume that "State vessels" include warships. 4. Such as unexploded ordnance and technology secrets, arguments that likely diminish in strength over time as technologies and secrets become outdated and less valuable. 5. 221 F.3d 634 (4th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, (pending at the time the statement was issued), Sea Hunt, Inc. v. Kingdom of Spain, 121 S.Ct. 1079 (2001). 104 INTER-AMERICAN LAW REVIEW [Vol. 33:1 title to two warships, La Galga and the Juno, which sank in U.S. waters in 1750 and 1802, respectively.' Following the holding of Sea Hunt and the issuance of the Statement, both of which attempt to prevent salvage attempts on sunken warships, the need arises for a well-grounded explanation as to why there is a unique interest in protecting warships not abandoned by the nation of origin. The concepts of sovereign immunity offer such an explanation. II. SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY This article addresses one justification for the protection of sunken warships. Specifically, the warship and its contents should retain the privileges of sovereign immunity. These privi- leges may be asserted against domestic intruders via the assertion of property rights, and against international would-be finders, sal- vors, and looters based on international law and practice. While some authors note that U.S. courts have failed to ade- quately examine why sunken warships are accorded special treat- ment from a policy perspective,7 there is a moderately well developed body of customary international law that governs the treatment of sunken warships and military aircraft.' Nonethe- less, since "[tihe policy of the United States concerning abandon- ment of its sunken vessels has not always been consistent,"9 it is necessary to examine past practices by states to determine if any trends or customs have developed regarding the treatment of warships. A. Domestic Protection of Sunken Warships - Property Versus Sovereignty 1. United States v. California Although the two are related, protection based on property 6. Id. at 639 7. See, e.g., Jerry E. Walker, A Contemporary Standard for Determining Title to Sunken Warships: A Tale of Two Vessels and Two Nations, 12 U.S.F Mar. L.J. 311, 312, apparently discarding the cases discussed supra in section IV, B, 3. In United States v. Steinmetz, 763
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tiger Sharks
    A taste of SOUTH AFRICA Edited by Edwin Marcow Dive photos by Andrew Texts by Edwin Marcow, Woodburn, Edwin Marcow, Andrew Woodburn and Dan Thomas Peschack. Beecham. Additional Wildllife photography reporting by Peter Symes by Edwin Marcow Covering an area of be seen to be believed. over 1,200,000 sq km, Since the end of apart- with nearly 3000km of heid eleven years ago rugged coastline, South more and more people Africa boasts some of have started travelling to the worlds most awe South Africa, not only to inspiring diving. experience the breath From the Great whites taking diving but also of the Western Cape, the spectacular scenery, to the epic Sardine vineyards, safaris, archi- Run, the pristine coral tecture, and local people reefs of Sodwana Bay that together make this and the Ragged Tooth destination a must for any Republic of South Africa Sharks of Aliwol Shoal, seasoned traveller. many of the sights and experiences must Over the following pages we’ll take you through some of the best dives sites, as well as look- ing in more detail at some experiences you can enjoy there. Join us now, as we discover EDWIN MARCOW South Africa 24 X-RAY MAG : 8 : 2005 EDITORIAL FEATURES TRAVEL NEWS EQUIPMENT BOOKS SCIENCE & ECOLOGY EDUCATION PROFILES PORTFOLIO CLASSIFIED travel The Best Dive Sights in South Africa SOUTH AFRICA WRECKS DOLPHINS MOZAMBIQUE AFRICA NORTHERN WHALES CORAL REEF PROVINCE KRUGER NATIONAL SHARKS PARK GAUTENG MAPUTO JOHANNESBURG SOUTH NORTH WEST SWAZILAND AFRICA THOMAS P. PESCHAK SODWANA BAY SA HLULUWE GAME FREE STATE RESERVE The primary three dive locations are Gansbaai, The KWAZULU NATAL Sardine Run, and Sodwana Bay - though there are also many interesting and varied shipwrecks dotting NORTHERN CAPE LESOTHO this rugged and extensive coastline.
    [Show full text]
  • This Week in New Brunswick History
    This Week in New Brunswick History In Fredericton, Lieutenant-Governor Sir Howard Douglas officially opens Kings January 1, 1829 College (University of New Brunswick), and the Old Arts building (Sir Howard Douglas Hall) – Canada’s oldest university building. The first Baptist seminary in New Brunswick is opened on York Street in January 1, 1836 Fredericton, with the Rev. Frederick W. Miles appointed Principal. Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) becomes responsible for all lines formerly January 1, 1912 operated by the Dominion Atlantic Railway (DAR) - according to a 999 year lease arrangement. January 1, 1952 The town of Dieppe is incorporated. January 1, 1958 The city of Campbellton and town of Shippagan become incorporated January 1, 1966 The city of Bathurst and town of Tracadie become incorporated. Louis B. Mayer, one of the founders of MGM Studios (Hollywood, California), January 2, 1904 leaves his family home in Saint John, destined for Boston (Massachusetts). New Brunswick is officially divided into eight counties of Saint John, Westmorland, Charlotte, Northumberland, King’s, Queen’s, York and Sunbury. January 3, 1786 Within each county a Shire Town is designated, and civil parishes are also established. The first meeting of the New Brunswick Legislature is held at the Mallard House January 3, 1786 on King Street in Saint John. The historic opening marks the official business of developing the new province of New Brunswick. Lévite Thériault is elected to the House of Assembly representing Victoria January 3, 1868 County. In 1871 he is appointed a Minister without Portfolio in the administration of the Honourable George L. Hatheway.
    [Show full text]
  • For Those in Peril on the Sea : the Motivations of Nineteenth Century European Artists to Create Shipwreck Paintings
    Sotheby's Institute of Art Digital Commons @ SIA MA Theses Student Scholarship and Creative Work 2020 For Those in Peril on the Sea : The motivations of nineteenth century European artists to create shipwreck paintings Calvin Liepins Sotheby's Institute of Art Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.sia.edu/stu_theses Part of the Ancient, Medieval, Renaissance and Baroque Art and Architecture Commons Recommended Citation Liepins, Calvin, "For Those in Peril on the Sea : The motivations of nineteenth century European artists to create shipwreck paintings" (2020). MA Theses. 76. https://digitalcommons.sia.edu/stu_theses/76 This Thesis - Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship and Creative Work at Digital Commons @ SIA. It has been accepted for inclusion in MA Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ SIA. For more information, please contact [email protected]. For Those in Peril on the Sea: The Motivations of Nineteenth Century European Artists to Create Shipwreck Paintings by Calvin Liepins A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the Master’s Degree in Art Business Sotheby’s Institute of Art 2020 13,788 Words For Those in Peril on the Sea: The Motivations of Nineteenth Century European Artists to Create Shipwreck Paintings By: Calvin Liepins This thesis will be an examination of the motivations of nineteenth century European artists to create paintings portraying shipwrecks. I have identified four main motivations, Nature over Man, Man over Nature, Political Position, and Personal Upheaval, and will analyze various works in order to view how each motivation relates to the other.
    [Show full text]
  • Maritime Archaeological Impact Assessment of Proposed Aquaculture Areas 1, 6 and 7, Algoa Bay, Eastern Cape Province
    MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED AQUACULTURE AREAS 1, 6 AND 7, ALGOA BAY, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE Assessment conducted under Section 38 (8) of the National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999) as part of a Basic Assessment Prepared for Anchor Research & Monitoring (Pty) Ltd On behalf of Department of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries February 2019 Prepared by John Gribble ACO Associates cc Physical: Unit D17, Prime Park, 21 Mocke Rd, Diep River Postal: 8 Jacobs Ladder St James, 7945 [email protected] Tel: 021 7064104 Cell: 078 616 2961 Fax to e-mail: 086 603 7195 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ACO Associates cc has been requested by Anchor Research & Monitoring (Pty) Ltd on behalf of Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries to undertake a desktop maritime archaeological impact assessment of three areas within Algoa Bay under consideration as aquaculture areas, namely Algoa 1, 6 and 7. This maritime heritage assessment report, supported by recommendations for implementable mitigation measures will form part of a Basic Assessment for the proposed development of aquaculture in Algoa Bay. Findings: In respect of submerged prehistoric archaeological potential, this assessment indicates that although there have, to date, been no specific studies of the submerged prehistory of Algoa Bay, the archaeological evidence for a hominin presence in the Algoa Bay region in the Earlier, Middle and Later Stone Age is plentiful. At various times in the last 900,000 global glacial cycles have caused substantial drops in sea level and the current seabed of Algoa Bay would have been exposed as a terrestrial landscape. Ancient river courses, whose channels are today buried under modern seabed sediment, would have been an important focus for hominin activity on the exposed continental shelf in the past and there is the potential for the occurrence of ancient, submerged archaeological material in association with palaeo- river channels.
    [Show full text]
  • 2003 Lndelr Sht S Volume 38 Mcinthly F 5.00
    2003 lndelr sht S Volume 38 McINTHLY f 5.00 I 30 years of lraditional seruice 5/30:35 ARose Blue 12l7r 30 years of Brittany Ferries 1/21 Alsatia 12140,12141* Atran 1/ll Altaskai pakol craft 1/19 Artevelde 4/45 Altmark 5/20 kun 3l5Z A Alwyn Vincent 8/39* Arundle crotle 10121, 12163 A bad day at the office, feature 1 'l /¿8-3 1 Alyssl'tll lfll0 Asama Maru 7|4o.,1111.0 A bouquet of Mersey daffodils (Mersey Special) 9/42 Ambra Fin 12154 Asanius 8/24 A new golden age forthe Maid 6/16-18 America Star 411*, 415, 7 12 Asgard ll 1 l/l 3 A port for the 21st cenluty 9/32-33 Amerian Adventure I 1/22 Asia'12/39' ¿ A. Lopez, screw steamship 5/26 Amerian Bankef Érgo ship 1 l/.l0 Asian Hercules 6/4 Shipping odyssey (Blue Funnel) 8/17 Amerian Range4 ergo ship 1 1/10 Asseburg l/12* Ticket to ride (Mersey Ferries) 6/1 6-20 Americ¡n Star 4/34 Assi Euro Link 4/4 Aütal role 7/20-21 iAmerigo Vespucci 6/54+, 8/30 Assyria 12139 Aasford'l/fc' Amerikanis 9146*,9148 Astoria 1212* AbelTroman 3/18 Amsterdam 2111*, 5130, 5134*, 5135 Astrea 9/52 Abercorn 4/33 Anchises 8/23r,8/24 Astraea 1ll42 Abercraig 8/,14,8.45* Anchor Line's argo vessel op€rations 5116 Asul6 7/40* Aadia 12127 Anchored in the past 5/l'l-17 Asturi$ 1/39 Accra 9/36 Ancon 5/38 Atalante 1f/22 Ae(¡nlury 1212* Ancona 5/7+ Athenia 1/,10, 3146, 5116, 6/50 'Achille lauro 9/47 Andania 12l¡O* Athlone Gstle 12163 Achilles 8/18 AndhikaAdhidaya 9/54* Atlantic 4/30, 1¿128 Adela¡de 11/47 Andrea 8/9 Atlantic convoys rememb€red 60 years on 7/1 3 Admhal Ghbanenko 7/13 Andrew Barker (lpswich) (Excursion Sh¡p SPecial) 6/42 Atlantic lifelines, feature 6/50-53 Admiral Gnier, ro+o 2/29 Andrewl.
    [Show full text]
  • Every Man for Himself: Gender, Norms and Survival in Martime Disasters
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Elinder, Mikael; Erixson, Oscar Working Paper Every man for himself: Gender, norms and survival in martime disasters Working Paper, No. 2012:8 Provided in Cooperation with: Department of Economics, Uppsala University Suggested Citation: Elinder, Mikael; Erixson, Oscar (2012) : Every man for himself: Gender, norms and survival in martime disasters, Working Paper, No. 2012:8, Uppsala University, Department of Economics, Uppsala, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-172527 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/82617 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Department of Economics Working Paper 2012:8 Every man for himself Gender, Norms and Survival in Maritime Disasters Mikael Elinder and Oscar Erixson Department of Economics Working paper 2012:8 Uppsala University April 2012 P.O.
    [Show full text]
  • 9 Human Settlement Pattern 9.1
    Overberg Spatial Development Framework March 2004 9 HUMAN SETTLEMENT PATTERN 9.1 DESCRIPTION OF SETTLEMENTS Caledon is the capital town of the region with Bredasdorp being the seat of the ODM. This is, however, only of academic importance as none of the two towns has developed fully to its allocated status. Four magisterial districts lend independent status to Caledon, Hermanus, Bredasdorp and Swellendam. The sections below provide a brief description (in alphabetical order) of the main towns and villages in the ODM (refer to Figure 8). It is important to note that all of the following information regarding the description and history of the various towns is quoted from one source, namely the website of Overberg Tourism (www.capeoverberg.co.za). Figure 8: Settlements of the Overberg District Municipality. a) Arniston / Waenhuiskrans The fishing village of Arniston is situated near the southernmost tip of Africa, approximately 24 km south-east of Bredasdorp. The bay in which Waenhuiskrans/Arniston is situated was occupied before 1820 by fishermen, who called it Kassiesbaai. The name of the village was derived from a British ship, the Arniston, which was wrecked here in 1815. Waenhuiskrans refers to a large cavern that can only be reached at low tide. Older inhabitants claim that a wagon and a span of oxen could turn in the cave. Overberg District Municipality 31 Dennis Moss Partnership Inc. Overberg Spatial Development Framework March 2004 Kassiesbaai, a well-known and attractively restored fishing village and a national monument in its entirety, is situated at Arniston/Waenhuiskrans. The rugged coastline of the continental shelf dominates the fishing hamlet with its population of 600.
    [Show full text]
  • From the Early Settlements to Reconstruction
    The Laird Rams: Warships in Transition 1862-1885 Submitted by Andrew Ramsey English, to the University of Exeter as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Maritime History, April 2016. This thesis is available for Library use on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I certify that all material in this thesis which is not my own work has been identified and that no material has previously been submitted and approved for the award of a degree by this or any other University. (Signature) Andrew Ramsey English (signed electronically) 1 ABSTRACT The Laird rams, built from 1862-1865, reflected concepts of naval power in transition from the broadside of multiple guns, to the rotating turret with only a few very heavy pieces of ordnance. These two ironclads were experiments built around the two new offensive concepts for armoured warships at that time: the ram and the turret. These sister armourclads were a collection of innovative designs and compromises packed into smaller spaces. A result of the design leap forward was they suffered from too much, too soon, in too limited a hull area. The turret ships were designed and built rapidly for a Confederate Navy desperate for effective warships. As a result of this urgency, the pair of twin turreted armoured rams began as experimental warships and continued in that mode for the next thirty five years. They were armoured ships built in secrecy, then floated on the Mersey under the gaze of international scrutiny and suddenly purchased by Britain to avoid a war with the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • 06-21A Queen's Birthday
    Great Britain, North Ireland & The Republic of Ireland Heritage, History, Traditions & Customs “The British Isles Historic Society Newsletter” 06-21a Queen’s Birthday June 12th. Queen Elizabeth’s II, Official Birthday the Sovereign's birthday was first officially marked in the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1748, for King June 6th. D-Day, George II. 1944, Battle of Queen’s Birthday History Normandy: The royal birthday, a.k.a. The King’s Birthday During World has been present on the United Kingdom calendar War II (1939-1945), since 1748 when King George II ruled. The exact day the Battle of has been moved around several times. Significantly, Normandy, which lasted from June 1944 to August King Edward, who reigned from 1902 to 1910, 1944, resulted in the Allied liberation of Western moved the celebration to summer in hope for better Europe from Nazi Germany’s control. Codenamed weather. Operation Overlord, the battle began on June 6, After the British Commonwealth stopped 1944, also known as D-Day, when some 156,000 existing as an Empire, various territories made their American, British and Canadian forces landed on five own decisions on keeping the Queen’s birthday beaches along a 50-mile stretch of the heavily holiday. Some even have two – for example, fortified coast of France’s Normandy region. The Scotland and Canada also observes the birthday of invasion was one of the largest amphibious military Queen Victoria in May. assaults in history and required extensive planning. The official ceremony of the Holiday, Trooping Prior to D-Day, the Allies conducted a large-scale The Colours, has existed in some forms since the deception campaign designed to mislead the 17th century.
    [Show full text]
  • Seminar on Shared Heritage Management Of
    Frontispiece illustration: Engraving of the sinking of HMS Guardian- published Dec 24th 1791, J & W Stratford, Holborn Hill- collection of John Gribble. ii Contents Page Editor’s Preface iv Contributors vi Introduction by Barbara Woroncow OBE, Conference Chair 1 Case Study: HMS Swift – Argentina by Dolores Elkin 2 Australian approaches to shared heritage: Royal Navy vessels in 17 Australian waters by Mark Staniforth HMS Birkenhead and the British warship wrecks in South African waters 30 by John Gribble Shared Heritage: British Shipwrecks in Florida by Della A. Scott-Ireton 45 International good practice or a few comments upon them 58 by Thjis J. Maarveld The management of protected historic warship wrecks in England’s 69 waters by Mark Dunkley and Ian Oxley Public archaeology by Chris Underwood 87 iii ‘Shared Heritage: Joint Responsibilities in the Management of British Warship Wrecks overseas’ International Seminar, 8th July 2008, University of Wolverhampton EDITOR’S PREFACE This is a collection of papers that were given at a seminar at the University of Wolverhampton on 8 July 2008, organised by Michael Williams of the School of Legal Studies and English Heritage. The importance of the topics discussed was emphasised by the attendance of delegates from North and South America, Europe and Australia. Archaeologists, lawyers, representatives of recreational diving groups and government departments listened to the invited speakers and joined in the discussions. The promotional material for the Seminar emphasised the wealth of wreck of British ships, both war and merchant, in the World’s oceans, The United Kingdom has, whilst asserting sovereign immunity for the wrecks of its warships, acknowledged that these wrecks may also comprise the underwater cultural heritage of other Sovereign States when they lie in their littoral waters.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Status of Sunken Warships "Revisited"
    Legal Status of Sunken Warships "Revisited" Mariano J. Aznar-Gómez* Lecturer in Public International Law Universitat de València I. INTRODUCTION The origins of this paper were three texts which appeared in the international litera- ture : the first - a normative text - was the recently adopted UNESCO Convention on the protection of the underwater cultural heritage;' the second - judicial - was a set of decisions adopted by several U.S. Courts on the ownership of two Spanish * The author wishes to thank Professors David J. Bederman, Vaugham Lowe and Tullio Scovazzi for their very useful critiques and comments to an earlier draft of this paper, and to Dr. Dolores Elkin for some information provided. Special thanks must also be given to James A. Goold, legal counsel of the Kingdom of Spain in some of the cases summarized in this article, for his invaluable clarifications of the US courts decisions. The opinions and errors in this paper, however, remain mine. This article is dedicated to the memory of Mariano Garcia Rubio. 1 Adopted by the 31 st UNESCO General Conference on 2 November 2001. Text in UNESCO Doc. 31C/24, 3 August 2001, available at �|·" http://www.unesco.org/culture/laws/underwater/typ="BWD2" xbd="832" xhg="402" ybd="1809" yhg="1774" ID="I79.19.1">html_eng/convention.shtml> [hereinafter UNESCO Convention]. The Convention has 35 articles and an Annex contaming the 'Rules concerning activities directed at underwater cultural heritage' [hereinafter the 'Rules']. These Rules, under Art. 33 of the Convention, "form an integral part of it and, unless expressly provided otherwise, a reference to this Convention includes a reference to the Rules." The drafting of the Convention was mainly inspired in the ILA Draft Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage [hereinafter the ILA Draft], adopted in 1994 during the International Law Association's meeting in Buenos Aires [see the text reprinted in Anastasia Strati, The Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage: An Emerging Objective of the Contemporary law of the Sea (1995), at p.
    [Show full text]
  • The Journal of the Honourable Company of Master Mariners
    Issue 4/2019 Volume XXV No. 004 The Journal of the Honourable Company of Master Mariners Livery Company of the City of London Founded 1926, Incorporated by Royal Charter 1930 Contents Court of the Company Wardens and Court from 1 May 2019 MASTER Captain W J Barclay FNI SENIOR WARDEN Captain D Chadburn IMMEDIATE PAST MASTER Captain R B Booth AFNI WARDENS Commander L A Chapman CMMar RN; Captain R F A Batt; Captain G English AFNI COURT OF ASSISTANTS The Honourable Company Commander P R F D Aylott MNI RN; Captain R W Barnes CMMar; Mr M Burrow; Captain B A Cushing; Mr C Dancaster; Captain S P of Master Mariners Donkersley RFA; Mr H Dundas; Captain I C Giddings FNI; Captain P T Hanton RFA; Captain L J Hesketh FNI; Commander D Ireland MBE PATRON MRIN; Captain J M Simpson; Mr J Johnson-Allen FRIN; Captain P J Her Most Gracious Majesty THE QUEEN McArthur MNM CMMar FNI FIMarEST; Captain J K Mooney AFNI; Master of the Merchant Navy and Fishing Fleets Captain T Oliver; Captain M C Powell FNI; Captain M A Robarts MNI ARINA; Captain N R Rodrigues; Captain T W Starr MSc LLM; ADMIRAL Captain S E Thomson CMMar; Captain H J Conybeare; His Royal Highness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, Captain F K D'Souza FNI; Captain M Reed RD* FNI RNR Lord High Admiral of the United Kingdom, KG KT OM GBE KCVO OUTPORT REPRESENTATIVES FOUNDER NE Scotland – Captain R Curtis Sir Robert Burton-Chadwick, Bt. Clyde – Mr H Dundas b. 1869 d.
    [Show full text]